[R-pkg-devel] new version jumps in minor?

[Uwe Ligges]

On 05.11.2024 20:54, Iris Simmons wrote:
> The auto checker will publish an R package that has Status: OK and no
> Note_to_CRAN_maintainers.
> 
> The auto checker will reject an R package that has WARNINGs and/or ERRORS.
> 
> The auto checker will flag an R package for manual inspection otherwise. A
> CRAN team member will see your NOTE and know it's nothing to worry about
> and publish it anyway. I've had similar before, and I've waited at most 5
> hours for someone to check and approve it.

This is much more difficult.

Most notes are actually also auo rejected, but not all, and that is a 
moving target, as we try to automate as much as possible.

Jumps in version numbers or results of spell check have a non neglible 
probability of false positives, hence get manually inspected once raised 
by the auto check system.

In this case the jump 1 --> 11 was flagged, because many people actually 
mean 1.1 instead, but it got manually confirmed and published.

Best,
Uwe Ligges





> On Tue, Nov 5, 2024, 14:29 Toby Hocking <tdhock5 using gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I thought that the auto-check robot only accepts submissions which
>> have Status: OK? (no NOTEs at all)
>> Is it documented somewhere which NOTEs are allowed by the auto-check
>> service?
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 4:10 AM Uwe Ligges
>> <ligges using statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> CRAN does not object to these versioning, the notes are not the reason
>>> for rejection. Who told they are?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Uwe Ligges
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05.11.2024 01:02, Josiah Parry wrote:
>>>> Rolf,
>>>>
>>>> The versioning method they’re using is referred to as CalVer
>>>> https://calver.org/ (not as catchy as SemVer) and it is actually quite
>>>> useful! With one look at the version you can get a good sense of it’s
>>>> general release date.
>>>>
>>>> Posit, for example, moved their professional products to use this
>>>> versioning method a number of years ago.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn’t poopoo it so quickly!
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 15:32 Rolf Turner <rolfturner using posteo.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:33:40 -0500
>>>>> Toby Hocking <tdhock5 using gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Version jumps in minor (submitted: 2024.11.2, existing: 2024.1.24)
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks to me that you are setting your version numbers in an
>>>>> unorthodox manner, which could/will confuse the living Drambuie out of
>>>>> people.
>>>>>
>>>>> I conjecture that you are setting your version number to represent the
>>>>> relevant date.  E.g. 2024.11.2  means 2 November, 2024 and 2024.1.24
>>>>> means 24 January 2024.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my understanding, the usual convention is for the version number to
>>>>> be of the form l.m.n (or l.m-n) --- major.minor.patch (or
>>>>> major.minor-patch).  The date should be specified in the *Date* field
>> of
>>>>> the DESCRIPTION file.
>>>>>
>>>>> It probably does not matter a hell of a lot.  "Writing R Extensions"
>>>>> just says that the version number should be "a sequence of at least
>> two
>>>>> (and usually three) non-negative integers separated by single ‘.’ or
>>>>> ‘-’ characters".
>>>>>
>>>>> However you might save yourself some "NOTEs" by adhering to the
>>>>> "l.m.n" convention and incrementing the components sequentially.
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rolf Turner
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow
>>>>> Department of Statistics
>>>>> University of Auckland
>>>>> Stats. Dep't. (secretaries) phone:
>>>>>            +64-9-373-7599 ext. 89622
>>>>> Home phone: +64-9-480-4619
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>>> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>>>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>>
> 
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel